Skip to content

Correct/Eliminate Limit Checks for Plant Condenser Loop Operation Schemes#11178

Merged
mitchute merged 5 commits intodevelopfrom
11171PlantEqiupmentOperationLimitIssue
Sep 26, 2025
Merged

Correct/Eliminate Limit Checks for Plant Condenser Loop Operation Schemes#11178
mitchute merged 5 commits intodevelopfrom
11171PlantEqiupmentOperationLimitIssue

Conversation

@RKStrand
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request overview

Description of the purpose of this PR

A user noted that for temperature based plant condenser loop operation schemes that temperature controls that used temperatures below 0C for the maximum of the range resulted in a severe error. This was problematic because in very cold climates it might be necessary to have control ranges that allow for temperatures below zero. It was also in conflict with the IDD which had a clear ranger of -70C to +70C as the range of allowable temperatures. As part of the fix, the checks within the get algorithm were removed because they are made superfluous by the correct definition of the IDD which already checks limits correctly before the code even get to this get algorithm. The code that makes sure that the minimum of the range is less than the maximum of the range was left in tact. No anticipated differences in the program output since this corrects an input reading issue and should not result in any calculation differences.

Pull Request Author

  • Title of PR should be user-synopsis style (clearly understandable in a standalone changelog context)
  • Label the PR with at least one of: Defect, Refactoring, NewFeature, Performance, and/or DoNoPublish
  • Pull requests that impact EnergyPlus code must also include unit tests to cover enhancement or defect repair
  • Author should provide a "walkthrough" of relevant code changes using a GitHub code review comment process
  • If any diffs are expected, author must demonstrate they are justified using plots and descriptions
  • If changes fix a defect, the fix should be demonstrated in plots and descriptions
  • If any defect files are updated to a more recent version, upload new versions here or on DevSupport
  • If IDD requires transition, transition source, rules, ExpandObjects, and IDFs must be updated, and add IDDChange label
  • If structural output changes, add to output rules file and add OutputChange label
  • If adding/removing any LaTeX docs or figures, update that document's CMakeLists file dependencies

Reviewer

  • Perform a Code Review on GitHub
  • If branch is behind develop, merge develop and build locally to check for side effects of the merge
  • If defect, verify by running develop branch and reproducing defect, then running PR and reproducing fix
  • If feature, test running new feature, try creative ways to break it
  • CI status: all green or justified
  • Check that performance is not impacted (CI Linux results include performance check)
  • Run Unit Test(s) locally
  • Check any new function arguments for performance impacts
  • Verify IDF naming conventions and styles, memos and notes and defaults
  • If new idf included, locally check the err file and other outputs

Removed code that was checking limits because the IDD was already checking the limits properly.  Old code had an additional condtion that contradicted the IDD.  None of these limit checks are actually needed except the check making sure the lower limit is below the upper limit.  Ranges are already checked against each other and a warning produced if the ranges overlap.
@RKStrand RKStrand added this to the EnergyPlus 25.2 milestone Aug 27, 2025
@RKStrand RKStrand self-assigned this Aug 27, 2025
@RKStrand RKStrand added the Defect Includes code to repair a defect in EnergyPlus label Aug 27, 2025
@RKStrand RKStrand requested a review from Myoldmopar September 4, 2025 15:28
Addition of a unit test to test the code for Defect #11171.  The problem was that the code was adding additional conditions that were unneeded and incorrect for temperatures.  Those were removed.  The unit test checks to make sure that the load range temperature max and min rules are being enforced correctly.
@RKStrand
Copy link
Contributor Author

RKStrand commented Sep 4, 2025

@Myoldmopar Ok, added the unit test and merge in the latest develop. Should be ready for review (assuming that this comes back all green which is what I anticipate). Thanks!

Oops.  Got aggressive with the equal sign.  Should have only been a single =, not a double ==.
@mitchute mitchute requested review from mitchute and removed request for Myoldmopar September 24, 2025 18:41
Copy link
Collaborator

@mitchute mitchute left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @RKStrand this looks good.

@mitchute mitchute merged commit 369c788 into develop Sep 26, 2025
13 of 14 checks passed
@mitchute mitchute deleted the 11171PlantEqiupmentOperationLimitIssue branch September 26, 2025 01:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Defect Includes code to repair a defect in EnergyPlus

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

PlantEquipmentOperation incorrect upper limit minimum to zero in all cases

4 participants